Associations Between Percieved Physical Safety,
Disengage-ment, and Trust in a Cohabiting Relationship
Garrett Formo, Undergraduate, Robin A. Barry, Ph.D
V1&V2 (Female)
Physical Safety-P
Disengagement _in_Discussion Physical Safety-P Pearson Correlation 1 .265*
Sig. (2-tailed) .016 N 86 83 Disengagement_in_Discussi on Pearson Correlation .265* 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .016 N 83 83
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
V1&V3 (Female)
RDI
Physical Safety-P
RDI Pearson Correlation 1 -.091
Sig. (2-tailed) .403
Physical Safety-P Pearson Correlation -.091 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .403 a. Listwise N=86 V1&V2 (Male) Physical Safety-P Disengagement _in_Discussion Physical Safety-P Pearson Correlation 1 .231*
Sig. (2-tailed) .040
Disengagement_in_Discussi on
Pearson Correlation .231* 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .040 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
b. Listwise N=80
V1&V3 (Male)
Physical
Safety-P RDI Physical Safety-P Pearson Correlation 1 -.339**
Sig. (2-tailed) .002
RDI Pearson Correlation -.339** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .002 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
b. Listwise N=82 RESULTS DISCUSSION/IMPLICATIONS ABSTRACT/SAMPLE PROCEDURE CONSTRUCTS
In the present study, we test whether people who perceive that their partner has endangered their physical safety are more disengaged (e.g., avoidant and withdrawn) during discussions with their partner and have lower trust levels regarding physical safety. Additionally, we will explore the concept of cognitive trickery/bias: how a person can
perceive something about their lives that is in reality not true (e.g., “my partner is very supportive of me in my
times of need” when in fact, their partner is not); these individuals might be less likely to behave or feel differently about their partner after experiences of physical violence, so we will examine whether individuals' relationship satisfaction moderates the influence of experiences of physical violence with the partner on their tendency to disengage and their trust in their partner and how it, along with understanding the epistemological limitations of testimony, can have an impact on psychological preconceptions regarding these variables.
There were 82 heterosexual couples and 4 homosexual couples that participated in this study, bringing us to a total of 172 individual participants. 82 of the participants were male whereas 90 of the participants were female. The only requirement for the study is that the couple is in fact cohabitating. This meaning that they live together. Mean of relationship length was 22.66 and the standard deviation of the same variable was 33.76. Our mean age came out to be 23.01 and the standard deviation was 4.05.
Perceived Physical Safety: Self-report measures of how safe an individual feels in their cohabiting relationship. Disengaging: Statements or actions that coencide with psychological conceptions of disengagement (avoident,
apethetic, distant, etc.)
Trust/Closeness(RDI): Self-report measures of intimate partner trust. IPV: Intimate Partner Violence
The sample for this study was recruited using an announcement that was sent to all faculty, staff, and students on the UMBC campus. Flyers for the study were also placed around the campus. The study took place in a lab on the UMBC campus and questionnaires were administered to participants. First, questionnaires like the CSI were given. These questionnaires have participants rate various questions on a scale from 1-5. These questions range from “In general, how satisfied are you in your relationship?” Next, a questionnaire regarding personal information such as education level, ethnicity, and annual income was administered.
Results indicate that these associations are present and this leads me to believe that for the most part, a person’s perception about their physical safety in their relationship is associated with how they feel about/interact with their partner. However, in one case there seemed to be no association between PPS and
Trust/Closeness. This could very well mean that either the participants involved commited some sort of cognitive self-deception, or they lied on their report.
Self-deception is something that has concerned psychologists and philosophers for ages. It is something that occurs frequently in relationships (cases including IPV in particular) and we still have no certain answer as to why or how, but there are compelling arguments that point towards different etiologies. One in
particular, is that “self-deception involves emotional mechanisms provoking a preference for immediate reward despite possible long-term negative
repercussions.” (Laura Federico 2016) In the sense of relationships, we could make the case that often times people in relationships deceive themselves
unintentionally to avoid long-term negative emotions that concern their problems in favor for short-term positive emotions as a form of coping. This falls right in line with the notion of cognitive trickery. Philosophically, this is a tough question to work with. The “veil of perception” is a philosophical notion that argues the
point that we can never access epistemological certainty contained within another person’s conscious, considering the only way we are able to gather information as humans is through our own senses. The question that arises is “how can we make definitive claims about information we can’t have access to in the first place?”
REFERENCES
Ali, P. A., Dhingra, K., & McGarry, J. (2016). A literature review of intimate partner violence
and its classifications. Aggression And Violent Behavior, 3116-25. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2016.06.008 Barry, R. A., Lawrence, E., & Langer, A. (2008). Conceptualization and assessment of
disengagement in romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 15(3), 297-315. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2008.00200.x
Griffin, D. W., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). Relationship Scales Questionnaire. Psyctests, doi:10.1037/t10182-000
Kim, J. Y., Oh, S., & Nam, S. I. (2016). Prevalence and trends in domestic violence in South
Korea: Findings from national surveys. Journal Of Interpersonal Violence, 31(8), 1554-1576. doi:10.1177/0886260514567960 Lauria F, Preissmann D, Clément F. Self-deception as affective coping. An empirical perspective
on philosophical issues. Consciousness And Cognition: An International Journal [serial online]. April 2016;41:119-134. Available from: PsycINFO, Ipswich, MA. Accessed April 28, 2017.
O’Leary, K. D., Tintle, N., & Bromet, E. (2014). Risk factors for physical violence against partners in the U.S. Psychology Of Violence, 4(1), 65-77. doi:10.1037/a0034537 Parker, E. M., Gielen, A. C., Castillo, R., Webster, D. W., & Glass, N. (2016). Intimate partner
violence and patterns of safety strategy use among women seeking temporary protective orders: A latent class analysis. Violence Against Women, 22(14), 1663-1681. doi:10.1177/1077801216631436
Sillito, C. (2012). Gendered Physical and Emotional Health Consequences of Situational Couple Violence for Heterosexual Married and Cohabiting Couples. Feminist Criminology, 7(4), 255-281. doi:10.1177/1557085111431695
